Posted in: Celebrity News

Seinfeld’s ‘Jason Alexander’ Sends Tweet, Attacks Gun Control Laws

Jason Alexander Talks About Gun Control On Twitter

Jason Alexander, the former star of hit TV series Seinfeld took to Twitter on Monday to attack the right to own guns following the Friday massacre of 12 people in Aurora, Colorado. After James Holmes killed his 12 victims and injured 59 others Alexander used the TwitLonger service to send out a long tweet that has divided many Twitter users who either support or fight against gun control.

Alexander wrote:

“@IJasonAlexander:I cannot understand support for legality of the kind of weapon in this massacre. It’s a military weapon.why should it be in non- mil hands?’

That initial tweet received a flurry of positive and negative responses which led Alexander to argue that guns were meant to arm militias and not private citizens. Alexander wrote:

“The advocates of guns who claim patriotism and the rights of the 2nd Amendment – are they in well-regulated militias? For the vast majority – the answer is no.”

Alexander than went after a group he called “absolutists” which he says described:

“Ideologues from both sides, but mostly from the far right who swear allegiance to unelected officials … that are to obstruct every possible act of governance, even the ones they support or initiate. Whose political and social goal is to marginalize the other side, vilify and isolate them with the hope that they will surrender, go away or die out.”

The actors biggest controversial statement however might be his claim that gun rights advocated are terrorists, he says of the”absolutists” he called out earlier:

“They hold the only truth, everyone else is dangerous. Ever meet a terrorist that doesn’t believe that? Just asking.”

It should be noted that Jason Alexander is only attacking assault rifles in his rant and not the control of all gun rights such as hand guns and shotguns.

Whether you agree with the Jason Alexander gun control argument or not one thing is for certain, with yet another shooting in Colorado that claimed the life of many people the gun control debate will likely once again be in full swing for a long time to come.

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

28 Responses to “Seinfeld’s ‘Jason Alexander’ Sends Tweet, Attacks Gun Control Laws”

  1. Anonymous

    Typical knee jerk response from a knee jerk liberal. What George doesn't realize is that the 2nd amendment, while mentioning a well regulated militia, clearly states that "The Peoples Right to keep and bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.". I cannot understand how folks like George here don't get that, can they not read? To help the rest of the revoke the 2nd Amendment crowd, here it is in full as passed by Congress:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

    I don't know how that can be interpreted in any other way. It is very clear to me that the founders were guaranteeing individual rights to keep and bear arms.

    Oh, and for those that do not know what a militia is, it isn't the Military, it is a group of civilians formed into a military unit. Therefore in order to permit civilians the ability to form into military units the Congress guaranteed an individual's right to keep and bear arms. How is it that George and the other Hollywood liberals don't get that is beyond me.

    Yes, I'm calling him by his character's name on Seinfeld on purpose.

  2. Anonymous

    Typical knee jerk response from a knee jerk liberal. What George doesn't realize is that the 2nd amendment, while mentioning a well regulated militia, clearly states that "The Peoples Right to keep and bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.". I cannot understand how folks like George here don't get that, can they not read? To help the rest of the revoke the 2nd Amendment crowd, here it is in full as passed by Congress:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

    I don't know how that can be interpreted in any other way. It is very clear to me that the founders were guaranteeing individual rights to keep and bear arms.

    Oh, and for those that do not know what a militia is, it isn't the Military, it is a group of civilians formed into a military unit. Therefore in order to permit civilians the ability to form into military units the Congress guaranteed an individual's right to keep and bear arms. How is it that George and the other Hollywood liberals don't get that is beyond me.

    Yes, I'm calling him by his character's name on Seinfeld on purpose.

  3. Anonymous

    tell this has been to go climb back under the rock he was hiding under. We don't need more regulation just enforce the laws we have and uphold our constitution.

  4. Stacey Willis Dand

    It was hard to read this with all the typos! James, you need a proofreader. Also, there is no way that American citizens need military weapons in their daily lives, so clearly something needs to change.

  5. Stacey Willis Dand

    It was hard to read this with all the typos! James, you need a proofreader. Also, there is no way that American citizens need military weapons in their daily lives, so clearly something needs to change.

  6. Susan Stockhammer

    Jason Alexander has it right! His extended twitter should be in the editorial section of every paper in America! Thank you, Mr. A.

  7. Keith Krupp

    Jason, you're an actor. Be quiet until someone tells you what to say and how to say it. You can try it over and over again.

  8. Ryan Wilkins

    David, AJ and Keith have to be hillbillies with no education. These rednecks are exactly what this stupid country needs to rid of. If anyone knows where to start, let me know. I'll be first in line.

  9. Anonymous

    Very typical Marycorrine. Make an emphatic statement and do not back it up with anything resembling facts and/or analysis. Typical liberal tactic. The NRA's position is not only defensible, it has actually been victorious in many courtrooms. So if that isn't defensible, what is? The NRA is the only organization in the country that defends our 2nd Amendment rights each and every day.

  10. Anonymous

    Has what right Susan? Certainly not his interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, so what is it about his rants that you think is right?

  11. Anonymous

    The level of ignorance on the 2nd Amendment and firearms is astounding since so many people here seem so emphatic about their views. As I said earlier, the 2nd Amendment clearly states that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms. That has been routinely challenged in the Supreme Court and they have consistently ruled that firearm ownership is an individual right. The other ignorant rant is these calls for elimination of "military style guns" available for civilian purchase. That would be a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment and any law would be overturned by the SCOTUS. The opening words to the 2nd Amendment are A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State… Tough to have a militia without military style guns folks.

    Now if you wish to debate the modern need for militia's fine, that has also been tried and failed.

    These guns are simply semi-automatic, meaning automatic reload, rifles and handguns. Not too much different from a revolver or auto-loading shotgun. They aren't the issue folks, the issue is what drives people like this guy to do what he did. How do we spot them before they act? What steps need to be taken to address their issues before they feel the need to do this? That is where our focus should be, not on how can we further dilute the 2nd Amendment.

    Also, all of you NRA Haters and 2nd Amendment Haters, did it ever occur to you that there's a reason it is the 2nd Amendment and not the fourth, fifth, or ninth? Because without the 2nd Amendment you cannot guarantee the 1st Amendment, and the Founders/Drafters knew this. It is also a Right to Keep and Bear Arms. So this "they were talking about muskets" crap is totally incorrect. If that were the case then it would have read the Right to Keep and Bear Muskets. They chose to use the word Arms for a reason.

  12. Anonymous

    The level of ignorance on the 2nd Amendment and firearms is astounding since so many people here seem so emphatic about their views. As I said earlier, the 2nd Amendment clearly states that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms. That has been routinely challenged in the Supreme Court and they have consistently ruled that firearm ownership is an individual right. The other ignorant rant is these calls for elimination of "military style guns" available for civilian purchase. That would be a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment and any law would be overturned by the SCOTUS. The opening words to the 2nd Amendment are A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State… Tough to have a militia without military style guns folks.

    Now if you wish to debate the modern need for militia's fine, that has also been tried and failed.

    These guns are simply semi-automatic, meaning automatic reload, rifles and handguns. Not too much different from a revolver or auto-loading shotgun. They aren't the issue folks, the issue is what drives people like this guy to do what he did. How do we spot them before they act? What steps need to be taken to address their issues before they feel the need to do this? That is where our focus should be, not on how can we further dilute the 2nd Amendment.

    Also, all of you NRA Haters and 2nd Amendment Haters, did it ever occur to you that there's a reason it is the 2nd Amendment and not the fourth, fifth, or ninth? Because without the 2nd Amendment you cannot guarantee the 1st Amendment, and the Founders/Drafters knew this. It is also a Right to Keep and Bear Arms. So this "they were talking about muskets" crap is totally incorrect. If that were the case then it would have read the Right to Keep and Bear Muskets. They chose to use the word Arms for a reason.

  13. Anonymous

    Obviously most of you who are blogging about the second amendment, by which you no little about, including Jason Alexander. Google "Thomas Jefferson and Gun Control." Check out why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment. As far a Jason's view on the second amendment, and belonging to a militia, that is only part of the reason why the second amendment was written. They say ignorance is bliss, and I believe that Jason is counting on our ignorance as holly-weird appears to believe that we the people, are blissfully stupid and incapable of researching the second amendment and the views of our founding fathers concerning this amendment. Jason believes that ignorant people need holly-weird, and the like, to explain to us the meaning of the second amendment. Duhhhh…drool..

  14. Anonymous

    Obviously most of you who are blogging about the second amendment, by which you no little about, including Jason Alexander. Google "Thomas Jefferson and Gun Control." Check out why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment. As far a Jason's view on the second amendment, and belonging to a militia, that is only part of the reason why the second amendment was written. They say ignorance is bliss, and I believe that Jason is counting on our ignorance as holly-weird appears to believe that we the people, are blissfully stupid and incapable of researching the second amendment and the views of our founding fathers concerning this amendment. Jason believes that ignorant people need holly-weird, and the like, to explain to us the meaning of the second amendment. Duhhhh…drool..

  15. Rebecca Lynn Matthews

    You are so correct david.gompert! "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those that who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attached with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson

  16. Joe Schwieger

    how do we fight the military if need be if we don't have the good weapons? that is a big part of the reason for citizens being armed, so we can fight the government if it ever became totalitarian.

  17. Joe Schwieger

    your feelings are understandable gun control people, but it's real simple. get the constitution changed, it's your only hope. good luck with that.

  18. Stacey Willis Dand

    Yes, "sithly_wonderful", it must be bliss for ignorant people…

  19. David Enos

    Since drunk driving deaths look to be almost 20 more times as prevalent than accidental gun deaths, I think we should intently be focusing on the real culprit here. Of course I'm speaking of the automobile. We really should outlaw the automobile. They are two to three tons of sheer terror if you ask me. It's not the poor, unfortunate inebriated individuals behind the wheel. So what if they've had a few too many drinks. So what if some of them are in this country illegally. They can't be responsible for all of that horsepower and weight behind them. Especially those imports. If the unthinkable happens, and they are involved in an automobile accident, and someone dies, it's the weight and speed of the automobile that killed the person, not the person behind the wheel. The government really should regulate the sale of automobiles. Automobiles should predominately be used in the military and law enforcement. All others should really learn to ride a bike or something.
    O.K. All of the silliness aside, the comments articulated by Mr. Alexander were at the very least, extremely ignorant. Since he's so staunchly against American citizens owning firearms (As our founders intended), Maybe, in good faith, he should publish his home address, so that real criminals know where to go for an easy midnight heist. I'm sure that he doesn't have any armed security or firearms on his premises. IN reality, If some people actually attempted to secure the facts before opening their misguided pie holes, they would learn that places that encourage citizens to practice their second amendment rights actually have drastically lower crime rates than those of gun restricted areas. I really don't think that the anti second amendment people really have a clue as to what their speaking about. It's almost like their mouths move according to their ideology, even if the facts are starkly contrary to their own belief system. There is a black market for firearms unlike any have seen. Our country's law enforcement is drastically outgunned when it comes to black market weapons. It's obvious that law enforcement has their hands full with all of the crime out there. It's also obvious that criminals are not deterred by law enforcement. When you look at areas where citizens are allowed to carry registered weapons, according to statistics across the board, low and behold, criminals are deterred. They aren't going to attack someone if they know that there's a strong possibility the person will have the ability to defend themselves. It's a very elemental concept, but a concept that has kept this country safe for over two hundred years. The solution is not to disarm our law abiding citizens. The solution is to allow our law abiding citizens to defend themselves in the even of a threat. On the other hand, if we systematically start disarming our citizens, we will just be welcoming more violent crime. Why, because there will always be a black market for guns. Time to read the facts Mr. Costanza.

  20. Alice Rice

    someone tell jason that the guy who paid for his own hamburger many yrs. ago, has another prediction for the future kentity.

  21. Daniel Duca

    are these people fucking morons the other day someone said this kid had a fully automatic weapon NO dumb fuck its an AR-15 i have one and its semi-auto you can't just hold down the trigger and unload its single fire. I'm so sick of idiots…..